Review: Why I am a Hindu

Why I am a Hindu by Shashi Tharoor
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Tharoor’s latest book is an eminently readable and highly persuasive critique of Hindutva, the ideology underpinning contemporary Hindu nationalism. Why I Am A Hindu does not purport to constitute a scholarly treatise on Hinduism. Indeed it isn’t one. The first section of the book in which Tharoor introduces his conception of Hinduism to readers is well-written and highly readable but lacking in scholarly rigor. Tharoor repeats platitudes often found elsewhere regarding Hinduism’s tremendous capaciousness and tolerance of diversity and plurality. While Tharoor is surely right that Hinduism respects and embraces plurality in ways that rival traditions have historically not, the book could have benefited from a more thorough and searching analysis of the basis of this tolerance and open-mindedness. There is of course a prior question that Tharoor’s book hints at but does not adequately resolve and that is what does Hinduism actually mean? There is a serious danger that fuzzy and non-scholarly attempts at presenting Hinduism have the unintended effect of rendering the category vacuous and hopelessly incoherent. By way of example, let’s think of Hinduism’s supposed respect for plurality a bit more deeply. Tharoor claims that Hinduism holds that all religions are equally true and equally valid paths to God/Salvation/Liberation. Is this right? The overwhelming majority of Hindu religious and theological traditions that fall within the umbrella of Hinduism would surely not accept this claim. After all, the great Vedantic theologians such as Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva expended great energy and intellectual effort in arguing with one another about the correct interpretation of scripture: they would not possibly endorse the view that all religions were equally true or equally valid. While it is surely true that the whole is often greater than the sum of its parts, more work needs to be done to explore this tension between the apparent inclusiveness of Hinduism and the emphasis on correct doctrine in the respective theological traditions that make up Hinduism. My view on the issue is that one can, without contradiction, uphold the primacy of one’s own theological view while conceding the soteriological value present in other religious traditions: this approach allows us to respect other traditions and encourages us to consider the various ways in which we can learn from them in deepening of our own commitment to truth and piety. It doesn’t however require that we commit ourselves to the incoherent view that all religions are equally true or valid.

The best and most rewarding part of Tharoor’s book is his account of the political philosophy that underpins Hindutva and Hindu nationalism more generally. Tharoor argues persuasively that Hindu nationalism impoverishes Hinduism in its homogenized and diversity-denying presentation of the religion. Tharoor’s critique is both well-informed and balanced: his presentation reflects the nuances that distinguish the main ideologues of the Hindutva tradition (V.D. Savarkar, Golwalker, and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya) and he is prepared to concede where his ideological interlocutors have good arguments (i.e. Upadhyaya’s commitment to humanism and poverty alleviation). All in all, this is an important and timely book and is worth reading for anyone interested in Hinduism, Indian political philosophy and contemporary India.

View all my reviews